What kind of sexist &*% is it to ask Barak Obama, over and over again, why he doesn't wear a flag pin but never to ask Hillary Clinton that same question even once? Can't women be patriotic? Don't women have lapels? collars? sweaters or other kind of garment to which a flag pin can be attached? Assuming it's that important . . .

What a dreadful waste of time, and to think I Tivo'd it because I thought I would miss something since I had a seminar when the "debate" was aired.

And, by the way, I went to my caucus for Hillary, so I'm not asking that question just because I think Obama was picked on unfairly. I just can't stand the trivia, drivel, and attempt to score a gottya that was displayed last night.

First, I have been a Clinton supporter. I went to my caucus in Washington state on her behalf and helped swing some delegates her way. That said, I was really disappointed with her performance at Wednesday's debate.

Yes, I still believe she has the best grasp of policy. She's very impressive. Very articulate. However, she looked so mean-spirited, showed none of the graciousness she's capable of, stuck the knife in every time she could. It might be too much to expect a politician who's fighting for her life to be anything less, but even if she won on policy points (which I think she did), she lost on the "likability" scale.

Obama gave her a chance to be gracious when he defended her "I could have stayed home and baked cookies" remark. But she would have none of it. She thinks wearing a flag pin is important? Where's hers? Or do the debate hosts think flag-pin-wearing is unfeminine? Or do they think that supporting a Constitutional amendment to make flag burning a crime shields her from any such criticism?

I haven't turned my back on her, but I'm disappointed in her. We'll see if the remaining superdelegates were impressed with her performance, if they like her McCain talking points.

It wasn't one of Obama's better performances, but he was right about the trivial questions and right to be critical of them. I didn't hear it as whining. I remember Clinton's criticizing the MSNBC commentators for always asking her the first question. Now that was whining. I have to quit or I am going to talk myself out of supporting her.

Pleeeeeeeeze! It would be nice to think so. I see no evidence of it. Forced apologies are better than no apologies, yes. But when the MSNBC guys make "real change," then I'll believe they want to do the right thing.

I have often been disappointed in Clinton's campaign. However everytime I get close to switching sides, these sexists attacks drive me back to supporting Hillary. If the MSNBC pundits really think the prolonged combat between Hillary and Barak is bad for the party, then they should try more balanced coverage and let the chips fall where they may.

Chris Matthews is panting/slobering to run for political office. I guess he wants to present himself as caring about the "little people," having the common touch, being one of the working class, a man of the people,etc. etc. If he could only listen to himself and his elitist pandering, he might have the decency to be embarrassed over his manufactured outrage, but I doubt it.

I have nothing against Obama. I like him very much and will support him enthusiastically when he becomes the nominee, as he almost certainly will; however it's hard to understand why NARAL felt they had to endorse NOW. Lloyalty use to mean something. Clinton has a long record of support, a much longer record of support than does Obama, by virtue of her age if nothing else. NARAL may not be a feminist organization per se, but organizations such as NARAL are fairly mainstream, like the Women's Political Cacaus and Emily's List, and usually support a woman who has been excellent in her support for their issues. I'm disappointed in NARAL. What did they gain by this endorsement now?

Glenn,

Let me add my voice to others urging you to write an editorial for the Washington Post.

Katherine Graham would want you to!

Thanks for the link to the Daily Howler article. Good analysis of the boys of MSNBC playing dumb. I was dumbfounded, however, to learn that you watch the entire Hardball show every day. How do you stand it? That would be punishment as bad as reading some of the reactions you get to your columns here. (By the way, they're unfair.)

Joan,

I agree with almost everything in your article. I have been dumbfounded at the sexism in this Presidential Primary race and at the tolerance for it. However, I cannot agree that Obama should sit down with Geraldine Ferarro. What happened to her? When she was selected to be Mondale's Veep, I was as excited as I've ever been about anything/anybody in politics; but she has behaved outrageously during this campaign. She did Hillary no favors.

What's with all you angry people out there? This was a very funny, clever article with some surprises. I actually wasn't crazy about no. 8, but, oh well, still funny.

Thank you, Rebecca for this great article. My sentiments exactly. I am disappointed with Pelosi's tepid remarks. I'm not sure that this is a case of "better late than never."